Dataset Information

Comparing a novel Catfish flow restoration device and the Solitaire stent retriever for thrombectomy revascularisation in emergent largevessel occlusion stroke: a prospective randomised controlled study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Catfish stent retriever is a newly developed mechanical thrombectomy device for rapid recanalisation in emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) stroke. The current trial aimed to assess whether the Catfish stent retriever is non-inferior to the Solitaire stent retriever in terms of outcomes in ELVO stroke.

Methods

This was a randomised, prospective, parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority study conducted at 18 sites in China. The primary outcome was the proportion of cases with successful recanalisation (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score of 2b or 3) following the procedure. Secondary efficacy outcomes included the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores at 24 hours and 7 days or discharge if earlier, time from artery puncture to successful recanalisation and good clinical outcome (modified Rankin scale score ≤2) at 90 days. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, all cause-death and severe adverse events at 90 days.

Results

Between 3 March 2019 and 5 June 2021, 118 and 120 patients were randomly allocated to the Catfish and Solitaire groups, respectively. The primary endpoint after all endovascular procedures was non-inferior in the Catfish group (88.5%, 100/113) than in the Solitaire group (87.7%, 100/114), with a rate difference (RD) of 0.78% (95% CI -7.64 to -9.20; p=0.001). Sensitivity analysis only considering the per-protocol set also yielded similar results, with an RD of 0.83% (95% CI -7.03 to -8.70; p<0.001). Additionally, the proportions of cases with good clinical outcomes (47.8% vs 50.0%, p=0.739) and all-cause death rates (17.7% vs 18.8%, p=0.700) were similar in both groups at 90 days.

Conclusions

The Catfish stent retriever is an effective and safe device for endovascular recanalisation in ELVO stroke.

Trial registration number

NCT03820882.

SUBMITTER: Luo G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10800261 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing a novel Catfish flow restoration device and the Solitaire stent retriever for thrombectomy revascularisation in emergent largevessel occlusion stroke: a prospective randomised controlled study.

Luo Gang G Yan Xiaoyan X Xiao Guodong G Wei Liping L Nai Bi Jiang Ya Li Kun YLK Ma Rongyao R Chen Wenhuo W Fang Chun C Zhou Zhiming Z Wan Jieqing J Peng Ya Y Zhang Guilian G Zhao Junfeng J Li Li L Yuan Haicheng H Wu Jin J Li Bing B Zhang Fan F Cheng Yuhong Y Gao Feng F Miao Zhongrong Z

Stroke and vascular neurology 20231229 6

<h4>Background</h4>The Catfish stent retriever is a newly developed mechanical thrombectomy device for rapid recanalisation in emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) stroke. The current trial aimed to assess whether the Catfish stent retriever is non-inferior to the Solitaire stent retriever in terms of outcomes in ELVO stroke.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a randomised, prospective, parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority study conducted at 18 sites in China. The primary outcome was ...[more]

PMID: 37045544

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and purposeClinical trials have demonstrated improved 90-day outcomes for patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with stent retriever thrombectomy plus tissue-type plasminogen activator (SST+tPA) compared with tPA. Previous studies suggested that this strategy may be cost-effective, but models were derived from pooled data and older assumptions.MethodsIn this prospective economic substudy conducted alongside the SWIFT-PRIME trial (Solitaire With the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke), in-trial costs were measured for patients using detailed medical resource utilization and hospital billing data. Utility weights were assessed at 30 and 90 days using the EuroQol-5 dimension questionnaire. Post-trial costs and life-expectancy were estimated for each surviving patient using a model based on trial data and inputs derived from a contemporary cohort of ischemic stroke survivors.ResultsIndex hospitalization costs were $17 183 per patient higher for SST+tPA than for tPA ($45 761 versus $28 578; P<0.001), driven by initial procedure costs. Between discharge and 90 days, costs were $4904 per patient lower for SST+tPA than for tPA ($11 270 versus $16 174; P=0.014); total 90-day costs remained higher with SST+tPA ($57 031 versus $44 752; P<0.001). Higher utility values for SST+tPA led to higher in-trial quality-adjusted life years (0.131 versus 0.105; P=0.005). In lifetime projections, SST+tPA was associated with substantial gains in quality-adjusted life years (6.79 versus 5.05), cost savings of $23 203 per patient and was economically dominant when compared with tPA in 90% of bootstrap replicates.ConclusionsAmong patients with acute ischemic stroke enrolled in the SWIFT-PRIME trial, SST increased initial treatment costs, but was projected to improve quality-adjusted life-expectancy and reduce healthcare costs over a lifetime horizon compared with tPA.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01657461.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough stent retriever (SR) is recommended as a frontline device of endovascular treatment (EVT) for embolic large artery occlusion causing acute ischemic stroke, contact aspiration (CA) device showed similar efficacy in the recent trials. However, the efficacy of the both devices as first-line therapy for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS)-related large vessel occlusion has not yet been established. Therefore, we compared the immediate effects and final outcomes of SR and CA as first-line devices for treating ICAS-related occlusions.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent EVT for acute ischemic stroke from the registry of three Korean hospitals. Patients with ICAS-related occlusion who were treated within 24 h of onset of the symptoms were included. We investigated immediate reperfusion performance, immediate safety outcomes, and 3-month clinical outcomes for the two first-line devices.ResultsOf the 720 registered patients, 111 were eligible for this study. Forty-nine patients (44.1%) used SR and 62 (55.9%) used CA as the first-line device. Achieving successful reperfusion immediately after first-line thrombectomy was more frequent in the SR group than that in the CA group (77.6% vs. 43.5%, p = 0.001), with fewer additional rescue treatments (12.2% vs. 59.7%, p < 0.001). The incidence of iatrogenic dissection or rupture was lower in the SR group than that in the CA group (8.2% vs. 29.0%, p = 0.012). After additional rescue treatments, however, the final successful reperfusion rate did not differ between the two groups (SR 87.8% vs. CA 77.4%, p = 0.247), and there was no significant difference in the 3-month good outcomes (modified Rankin Scale, p = 0.524).ConclusionsFirst-line SR thrombectomy showed higher immediate reperfusion and less vessel injury for ICAS-related occlusions than CA. However, there was no significant difference in the final reperfusion status or 3-month outcomes from additional rescue treatments.

Project description:ImportanceStent retriever-based thrombectomy is highly beneficial in large vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes. Many stent retriever designs are currently available, but comparison of these technologies in well-conducted studies is lacking.ObjectiveTo determine whether thrombectomy for LVO stroke with the pRESET stent retriever is noninferior to treatment with the Solitaire stent retriever.Design, setting, and participantsThis study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label, adaptive, noninferiority trial with blinded primary end point evaluation. Between October 2019 and February 2022, multicenter participation occurred across 19 research hospitals and/or universities in the US and 5 in Germany. Patients with LVO stroke were enrolled and included up to 8 hours after symptom onset.InterventionsPatients underwent 1:1 randomization to thrombectomy with the pRESET or Solitaire stent retriever.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the difference in the rate of 90-day functional independence across the 2 devices, using a -12.5% noninferiority margin for the lower bound of the 1-sided 95% CI of the difference between pRESET and Solitaire retrievers.ResultsOf 340 randomized patients, 170 (50.0%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 73.0 (64.0-82.0) years. The study procedure was completed in 322 of the 340 randomized patients. The primary end point of 90-day functional independence was achieved by 95 patients (54.9%; 95% CI, 48.7-61.1) in the pRESET group and in 96 (57.5%; 95% CI, 51.2-63.8) in the Solitaire group (absolute difference, -2.57%; 95% CI, -11.42 to 6.28). As the lower bound of the 95% CI was greater than -12.5%, the pRESET retriever was deemed noninferior to the Solitaire retriever. The noninferiority of pRESET over Solitaire was also observed in the secondary clinical end point (90-day shift in modified Rankin Scale score) and in both angiographic end points (Expanded Treatment in Cerebral Infarction [eTICI] score of 2b50 or greater within 3 passes: 146 of 173 [84.4%] vs 149 of 167 [89.2%]; absolute difference, -4.83%; 95% CI, -10.84 to 1.19; eTICI of 2c or greater following the first pass: 76 of 173 [43.7%] vs 74 of 167 [44.3%]; absolute difference, -0.63%; 95% CI, -9.48 to 8.21). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 0 patients in the pRESET group and 2 (1.2%) in the Solitaire group. Mortality occurred in 25 (14.5%) in the pRESET group and in 24 (14.4%) in the Solitaire group at 90 days. Findings of the per-protocol and as-treated analyses were in concordance with findings of the intention-to-treat analysis.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, among patients with LVO stroke, thrombectomy with the pRESET stent retriever was noninferior to thrombectomy with the Solitaire stent retriever. Findings suggest that pRESET offers a safe and effective option for flow restoration and disability reduction in patients with LVO stroke.

Project description:ImportanceMechanical thrombectomy using a stent retriever or contact aspiration is widely used for treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion, but the additional benefit of combining contact aspiration with stent retriever is uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine whether mechanical thrombectomy for treatment of anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke with initial contact aspiration and stent retriever combined results in better final angiographic outcome than with standard stent retriever alone.Design, setting, and participantsThis trial was a multicenter randomized, open-label, blinded end point evaluation that enrolled 408 patients from October 16, 2017, to May 29, 2018, in 11 French comprehensive stroke centers, with a 12-month outcome follow-up. Patients with a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation were included up to 8 hours after symptom onset. The final date of follow-up was June, 19, 2019.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned (1:1 allocation) to receive initial thrombectomy with contact aspiration and stent retriever combined (205) or stent retriever alone (203).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the rate of expanded Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction score of 2c or 3 (eTICI 2c/3; ie, scores indicate near-total and total reperfusion grades) at the end of the procedure.ResultsAmong the 408 patients who were randomized, 3 were excluded, and 405 (99.3%) patients (mean age, 73 years; 220 [54%] women and 185 [46%] men) were included in the primary analysis. The rate of eTICI 2c/3 at the end of the endovascular procedure was not significantly different between the 2 thrombectomy groups (64.5% [131 of 203 patients] for contact aspiration and stent retriever combined vs 57.9% [117 of 202 patients] for stent retriever alone; risk difference, 6.6% [95% CI, -3.0% to 16.2%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.33 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.99]; P = .17). Of 14 prespecified secondary efficacy end points, 12 showed no significant difference. A higher rate of successful reperfusion was achieved in the contact aspiration combined with stent retriever group vs the stent retriever alone group (eTICI 2b50/2c/3, 86.2% vs 72.3%; adjusted OR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.51 to 4.28]; P < .001) and of near-total or total reperfusion (eTICI 2c/3, 59.6% vs 49.5%; adjusted OR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.02 to 2.27]; P = .04) after the assigned initial intervention alone.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion, an initial thrombectomy technique consisting of contact aspiration and stent retriever combined, compared with stent retriever alone, did not significantly improve the rate of near-total or total reperfusion (eTICI 2c/3) at the end of the endovascular procedure, although the trial may have been underpowered to detect smaller differences between groups.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03290885.

Dataset Information

Comparing a novel Catfish flow restoration device and the Solitaire stent retriever for thrombectomy revascularisation in emergent largevessel occlusion stroke: a prospective randomised controlled study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Comparing a novel Catfish flow restoration device and the Solitaire stent retriever for thrombectomy revascularisation in emergent largevessel occlusion stroke: a prospective randomised controlled study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets